Bug 77114 – IndexedDB: WebCore::IDBKey objects are leaked

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: FIXED
• Component: New Bugs

[Joshua Bell]

IndexedDB: WebCore::IDBKey objects are leaked

[Joshua Bell]

Created attachment 124135 [details]
Patch

[Joshua Bell]

Tossing the patch up to let the bots have at it. On the one hand this looks like a no-brainer. On the other hand, it can't be this easy, can it?

[David Grogan]

Comment on attachment 124135 [details]
Patch

Looks promising.  You'll have to get rid of the No new tests. (OOPS!) line.

[David Grogan]

Comment on attachment 124135 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=124135&action=review

> Source/WebCore/storage/IDBKey.h:69
> +        RefPtr<IDBKey> idbKey = adoptRef(new IDBKey());

Though, could you change these to use the common IDBKey::create() pattern?

[Joshua Bell]

(In reply to comment #4)
> (From update of attachment 124135 [details])
> View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=124135&action=review
> 
> > Source/WebCore/storage/IDBKey.h:69
> > +        RefPtr<IDBKey> idbKey = adoptRef(new IDBKey());
> 
> Though, could you change these to use the common IDBKey::create() pattern?

Do you mean, change these (where possible) to IDBKey::create(<Type>) with various type overloads, or adding a private static IDBKey::create() that the current createXXX() methods are changed to call?

[David Grogan]

Comment on attachment 124135 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=124135&action=review

>>> Source/WebCore/storage/IDBKey.h:69
>>> +        RefPtr<IDBKey> idbKey = adoptRef(new IDBKey());
>> 
>> Though, could you change these to use the common IDBKey::create() pattern?
> 
> Do you mean, change these (where possible) to IDBKey::create(<Type>) with various type overloads, or adding a private static IDBKey::create() that the current createXXX() methods are changed to call?

I had meant the second, but I hadn't noticed that these were already createXXX methods.  So an IDBKey::create() probably doesn't add much.  Request retracted.

[Joshua Bell]

Created attachment 124149 [details]
Patch

[Joshua Bell]

tony@ - can you r? 

Again, this seems simple enough that I feel like I'm missing something.

[Tony Chang]

Comment on attachment 124149 [details]
Patch

This looks correct.  There are other examples of this pattern in the code (e.g., SecurityOrigin::create).

[Joshua Bell]

I'll verify this with valgrind if possible before landing it.

[Joshua Bell]

Running under valgrind:

sh tools/valgrind/chrome_tests.sh -t ui --gtest_filter='IndexedDBUILayoutTest.LayoutTests'

* Without this patch it reports 11 suppressions of bug_109463 http://crbug.com/109463
* With this patch it reports 0 suppressions of bug_109463

I'm calling that good.

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 124149 [details]
Patch

Clearing flags on attachment: 124149

Committed r106059: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/106059>

[WebKit Review Bot]

All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.